SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Clinical characteristics of Lewy body dementia in Chinese memory clinics.

BMC Neurol · 2021-03-31

DOI: 10.1186/s12883-021-02169-wPMID: 33789600

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

BackgroundLewy body dementia (LBD), consisting of dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and Parkinson's disease dementia (PDD), is the second most common type of neurodegenerative dementia in older people. The current study aimed to investigate the clinical characteristics of LBD in Chinese memory clinics.MethodsA total of 8405 dementia medical records were reviewed, revealing 455 patients with LBD. Demographic data, neuropsychological scores, and the scale for Medial Temporal lobe Atrophy (MTA) were then analyzed from nine memory clinics in the China Lewy Body Disease Collaborative Alliance.ResultsThe clinical proportion of LBD among the subjects and among all dementia types was 5.4% (4.9-5.9%) and 7.3% (6.7-8.0%), respectively, with a mean onset age of 68.6 ± 8.4 years. Patients with DLB comprised 5.6% (n = 348, age of onset 69.1 ± 8.3), while PDD comprised 1.7% (n = 107, age of onset 66.7 ± 8.8) of all dementia cases. There were slightly more males than females with DLB (n = 177, 50.9%) and PDD (n = 62, 57.9%). Patients with DLB had a poorer performance compared to those with PDD on the MMSE (16.8 ± 7.1 vs. 19.5 ± 5.7, p = 0.001), the MoCA (11.4 ± 6.6 vs. 14.0 ± 5.8, pConclusionsVariations of diagnoses exists in different regions and the clinical proportion of LBD is likely to be underestimated in China and other regions.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.